linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 03/11] sched: Add sched tracepoints for RV task model

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20250217113929.5c205c53@gandalf.local.home>
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2025 11:39:29 -0500
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Gabriele Monaco <gmonaco@...hat.com>
Cc: kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo
 Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Masami
 Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>, linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 oe-kbuild-all@...ts.linux.dev, Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 03/11] sched: Add sched tracepoints for RV task model

On Fri, 14 Feb 2025 12:15:31 +0100
Gabriele Monaco <gmonaco@...hat.com> wrote:

> > >  > 503 __do_trace_sched_set_state_tp(current, current->__state,   
> > > state_value); 
> > >    504 } 
> > >    505 EXPORT_SYMBOL(__do_trace_set_current_state); 
> > >    506   
> >    
>  
> I honestly don't get why this build failed. The function __do_trace_
> exists since cff6d93eab00ba ("tracepoint: Reduce duplication of
> __DO_TRACE_CALL"), a while before that it was just a macro and not an
> inline function, reason why no one so far used it directly.
> 
> Both failed builds are based on 4dc1d1bec898 (where my patchset is
> based) and there __do_trace_ does exist.
> 
> Unless there's a strong opinion not to use it although the compiler
> allows it, I'd consider the two kernel robot results false negatives.
> 
> Or am I missing something?

It's because you should not be using the internal macros of a tracepoint.
Just use the tracepoint itself.

I replied to the patch.

-- Steve